Monday, 23 November 2009

The International Auxiliary Language

The day will come when primary schooled young will learn three languages: the local lingo, a neighbours lingo, and new-arabic.

for the Inter-Aux-Lang Baha'ullah favoured arabic over persian.

O members of parliaments throughout the world!Select ye a single language for the use of all on earth,and adopt ye likewise a common script. God, verily,maketh plain for you that which shall profit you andenable you to be independent of others. He, of a truth,is the Most Bountiful, the All-Knowing, the All-Informed.This will be the cause of unity, could ye butcomprehend it, and the greatest instrument forpromoting harmony and civilization, would that yemight understand!(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 88)

a bit subtle there. He just so happens to mirror the speach and timber of the Koran (perchance a clue?). ok it was writen in arabic then. take you time sherlock. His native language was persian ie iranian. their adopeted names are ofcourse in arabic.

Until quite recently, a number of Bahá'ís in the West thought the "existing language" might be Arabic, based onAdib Taherzadeh's comments regarding Bahá'u'lláh's "Tablet of the International Auxiliary Language and Script":

"In this Tablet Bahá'u'lláh praises the Arabic language for its expressiveness and eloquence, and remarks that no other language can match its vast possibilities. He further states that God would be pleased if all the peoples of the world were to speak the Arabic language. But he does not require humanity necessarily to adopt it as the international language; rather He leaves the choice to the appropriate institutions."

perhaps most importance is the logic of semetic coherence of kindren words being derived from the same root, ie: Kitab KTB method as a root for the words book, author, and writing - as you can see they is not related in enlgish. war and warrior gets close, but the english prefer to use war and soldier or troops.. not good for more peoples learning a language or extra language.

another thing with the arabic, based on classical-to modern standard arabic, would be perahps an ease of relation usage or consistancy of useage lost in modern arabic: for example MuJehadin rather than Mujahideen... Mu person, Jehad = Jehad, in plural. person of Jehad plural, persons of Jehad. ie Jehadis.

same word ism rather than alteration of Jehad to Jahid - fine for the arabs and MSA but pointless in easyer to learn International Auxiliary standby.and keep it simple - as in plane english or rather...plane arabic.no one said it was to be a linguistic joyride for semites.

you'd never guess from wiki.can learn arabic here!.Its allready a wide spread language, (northern africa and middle east), and a linga franc (islam 22% of earth pop). as an irony its numerals have been adopted in english-Europe and pretty much the world after the roman empire...as a usable upgrade! It is a pre-islamic language! see baal.

anyhow, whats the point of having obsure gender variations, like female words ending in ah when they are then jumped and refered to as token males and spoken of in the masculine.. there is an example somewhere...

"That proposition which is especially beloved, when presented before the Heavenly Throne, is that all should converse in the Arabic language. This, inasmuch as it is the most comprehensive of all languages (absat az kull al-lughat).

If a person were to become truly aware of the comprehensiveness and the broad scope of this most eloquent language, they would assuredly select it.

The Persian language is extremely sweet. The tongue of God in this dispensation has revealed in both Arabic and Persian. Persian, however, does not, and will never have, the magnitude of Arabic. Indeed, relative to it, all languages have been, and will remain, circumscribed. This is the most-gracious state of affairs which has been mentioned." From an unofficial translation by Dr. Stephen Lambden at [1"

that is because the arabs are semites and spatially gifed.So what is the fear of arabic but the fear of islam?the other baha , Abdul Baha no less (his name is in arabic not esperanto), promoted esperanto... but it is a joke of no linguistic merit or coherence or power.did he like esperanto? as wiki was midlead? no.

"Also, while pointing to the benefits of Esperanto, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá said that it is too difficult and needs to be perfected. The specific reforms he mentions have not been incorporated into any existing reform of Esperanto, though other constructed language projects have come close. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá said:

"We must endeavour with all our powers to establish this international auxiliary language throughout the world. It is my hope that it may be perfected through the bounties of God and that intelligent men may be selected from the various countries of the world to organize an international congress whose chief aim will be the promotion of this universal medium of speech."

notice the date. This is the rejection of esperanto by Abdul Baha, its only promoter.

but some put the quotes in wrong order to support esperanto.

If arabic is spoken by God, to Baha'iz (does anyone read with comprehension?)... and its is done so because of its virtues...the god of logic will help you here.

why leave the best language on earth too ...islaam?in that is a danger.ahh the british schools try promoteing arabic now. thank the gods..

Then bring a sura like it?Baha ullah accepted Mohammed as a prophet of god ~(not the last) and the koran as a scripture sent by god (not the end of all better of all) # but..The quran itself challenges and allows people to try to bring forth a sura ~(chapter~) like found in the koran!

(10:37-8)"This Qur'an is not such as could ever be invented."The Quran is so perfect it could never be invented. Go ahead and try to write a Surah as great as those in the Quran.

10, Jonah says in the Quran:10:38 Or say they: He hath invented it ? Say: Then bring a surah like unto it, and call (for help) on all ye can besides Allah, if ye are truthful.

ullah will do. In this for a different reason, that it could be done, Baha ullah brough forth:

O members of parliaments throughout the world!Select ye a single language for the use of all on earth,and adopt ye likewise a common script. God, verily,maketh plain for you that which shall profit you andenable you to be independent of others. He, of a truth,is the Most Bountiful, the All-Knowing, the All-Informed.This will be the cause of unity, could ye butcomprehend it, and the greatest instrument forpromoting harmony and civilization, would that yemight understand!(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 88)

to which only a fool could not see it could have come from the coran; and mistake if for the koran if they knew not better!there for it came from the same!,

thank you Brian for your comment! :)many would like esperanto i guess but arabic has allready established itself very well and has its inherent brilliance. frankly esperanto is shit.but thanks for the comment and plugs.

Ever notice how everybody seems to consider their own (usually "native" or first/"birth") language to be the foremost paragon and exemplar of both rational and artistic expressiveness, which other languages cannot hope to match -- at least, this is what I've encountered when studying English (my own "native" language) German (my parent's native language), French (2nd official language in both my countries of citizenship), Spanish and Japanese (just dabbled with those) and have heard from acquaintances about their native languages (eg. Arabic, Persian/Farsi, Chinese, Croatian, Russian, Portuguese, Italian, Greek, to name a few). I've also read similar paeans to Turkish, various Asian languages, and some others. While some languages may be lacking in various regards, all current, living, modern languages seem to be more than adequate in these respects, and all the "big" languages (and many "smaller" ones) have sufficient resources for the modern era.

But the obvious problem with Arabic is that it can hardly be considered as a neutral choice for an international auxillary language, on political, cultural or religious grounds. You might as well suggest Hebrew or Latin for the role, and see how far that gets you. No matter which national or ethnic language one proposes, some group will have strong reasons to object to that language.

Add in the problems of teaching or learning a foreign language to a reasonable degree of mastery, and many "suitable" languages no longer appear to be realistic contenders.

For example, English (my own "native" language, which anglophones often believe to be "easy") -- which is often presented as THE "de facto" lingua franca -- is highly problematic.

Even in Europe, actual studies show that even in most supposedly english-proficient populations, the number of generally-competent english-speakers -- when actually tested -- is about 5% or less (Sweden, Netherlands about 12%, Germany about 6%, elsewhere usually much less).

Even in "native" anglophone countries, the differences are a distinct problem. Words and phrases can mean quite different things -- even opposite things, in Britain and the USA (eg "to table a motion"). Indian English, Japanese English and Chinese variants can be even more divergent and confusing. This is perhaps only to be expected in a language that is so notoriously idiomatic and inconsistent.

The best solution so far presented would appear to be Esperanto -- it's politically and religiously neutral, is demonstrably several times easier to learn than even the "easy" national/ethnic languages, and has been subjected to practical testing on an international scale for well over a century. The main obstacle to Esperanto has so far been the resistance from "influential" languages (more precisely their "native" countries and linguistically-skilled elites who benefit) who have more or less clearly understood the political and economic advantages inherent in possessing a "preferred language" status. And sometimes also those hoping to raise their own "native" language to that privileged position.